• rumba@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 hours ago

    If I obviously orientate my phone towards you or your kids, you’ll be totally cool?

    You don’t need to obviously do that, a reasonably wide lens and you “reading social media” would do the same. It happens all the fucking time.

    Now assume that a smartpervert glass wearer is doing just that but you don’t know about it.

    Assume every time someone has their phone in front of them their camera is on and has at least a 45 degree viewing angle.

    I’m saying it’s exactly the same on a phone, don’t delude yourself that it isn’t happening or that it’d be totally obvious

    • matlag@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      You don’t need to obviously do that, a reasonably wide lens and you “reading social media” would do the same. It happens all the fucking time.

      No, I don’t think it happens “all the fucking time”. That it happens is granted. I don’t think it’s that common.

      I’m saying it’s exactly the same on a phone, don’t delude yourself that it isn’t happening or that it’d be totally obvious

      Smartphones have an incredibly range of usage, and no one ever advertised them as “tool to secretly take pics and videos of people around you”. And no, it’s not that easy to film people secretly: you need to maintain the phone with the right orientation for an extended period of time and if you or the target move, it gets more and more obvious.

      Smartglasses are almost made for that, and the abuses are already showing out there:

      https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/meta-glasses-app-covert-filming-women-girls-safety-b2942005.html https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/meta-glasses-covert-recording-9.7139927 https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/09/world/manfluencers-smart-glasses-intl https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx23ke7rm7go

      I’m not the delusional here. You’re in denial of what’s already happening. And without a strong regulation, it will get worse.

    • dmention7@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      7 hours ago

      This comparison is like saying that, because a car can be used to run over pedestrians at any time, there is no reason to be alarmed about people installing the Crosswalk-pocalypse 5000 (now with 30% more spikes!) on their front bumper.

      Of course we know people can discretely record you with a phone. The difference is that the fraction of people doing that is very small, while the percentage of people doing that with Meta glasses is basically 100%.

      • rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        the fraction of people doing that is very small, while the percentage of people doing that with Meta glasses is basically 100%.

        care to give me any citation at all on that?

        • dmention7@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Honestly, pulling it out of my ass.

          Now your turn… what is your definition of “very small”, and where is your citation that a larger percentage of the population uses their phone camera to discretely creep on people?

      • rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        My problem is we’ve let it through literally everywhere else, cameras, cellphones, public survielance, dashcams. The one thing that i’d actually like to be able not to pull my phones out for is the hill to die on. it just all seems really fucking pointless